Consult Climate

The terms 'carbon neutral' and 'net zero' are still used interchangeably, but less so now that carbon neutrality's halo has been smudged. But what do they actually mean? And net zero of what? After discussing with a few colleagues, I've tweaked a graphic that aims to simplify the main differences between the oft-conflated terms: The term 'Climate Positive' now trumps 'Carbon negative' and 'Net Negative Emissions' — mostly for comms reasons. For scientists out there, I'm happy to take flak for that. And I've clarified that offsets can represent both reductions and removals to avoid confusion. As I type this I can hear Andy Reisinger and Joeri Rogelj's voices ringing in my head on the temporal dimensions of net zero. So just to be clear: Net zero CO2: The IPCC says that limiting heating to 1.5 °C by 2100 (with no/limited temp. overshoot) requires the world to achieve #netzero CO2 in about *the early 2050s* — alongside deep, immediate and sustained reductions in other greenhouse gases (GHGs). Net zero GHGs: Even in the most ambitious mitigation pathways, net zero GHG emissions are not reached until about *the early 2070s* — and some pathways that limit heating to 1.5 °C by 2100 do not reach net zero GHG emissions at all. As always, this diagram is a work in progress so let me know if I should adjust or add. For example, might it be more complete if I added (i) the temporal dimension, as above; and/or (ii) more context on the differences between emission reductions and removals? The online, more HD version lives on the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit's website: https://lnkd.in/ekrwuF-r Kaya Axelsson Alexis McGivern Oxford Net Zero Katharine Hayhoe

Our latest report lands today, on Earth Day. It compares the #netzero targets of the world’s largest 100 private companies with their public counterparts. To give a sense of scale, the combined annual revenue of these 200 companies is roughly $23 trillion, or 23% of the global economy. In light of these findings, we're proud to announce today we're increasing the scope of companies we track to include these 100 private companies (on top of the 2,000 largest public companies). Please visit the Net Zero Tracker company table on our homepage for more. Back to the report... On net zero target-setting by private firms, we found: - Only 40% have set net zero targets, compared with 70% of the world’s largest public companies. - 52% have set net zero or emission reduction targets, compared with 82% of the world’s largest public companies. - Of the world's largest 10 private companies, only 4 have set net zero targets, compared with 9 of the world's 10 largest public companies. On the quality, or lack thereof, of those #netzerotargets we found: - **Only eight (or 20%) have published plans to deliver on their pledges**, compared with 56 (or 80%) of the 70 public companies. - Only two — IKEA (Netherlands) and Bechtel Corporation (US) — rule out the use of carbon credits to achieve their net zero goals. - Incremental progress elsewhere. What does this mean? If ‘sunlight is the best disinfectant’ for climate inaction, most private companies are operating nocturnally. The fact only 20% have published plans to meet their pledges (compared with 80% of public firms) screams #greenwash. A pledge without a plan is not a pledge, it's a naked PR stunt. Similarly, an incomplete or deficient ‘plan’ is not a plan. We must push private companies out from the shadows. Promisingly, the EU's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive — which creates a ‘duty to disclose’ — does not differentiate b/w public and private companies. Almost 50,000 EU and non-EU firms will ultimately have to report their emissions + climate impacts, including many large private companies from 1 Jan 2025. And, once adopted, the extra-territorial Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive will create a ‘duty to act’ — and not just for EU-based companies. Regulatory efforts elsewhere are starting to address the public-private disparity. But we need more jurisdictions taking this issue seriously. Of course, the holy grail is mandatory transition planning, as the UN Secretary-General António Guterres' Expert Group report led by Catherine McKenna made clear: an 'essential tool'. The full report is here: https://lnkd.in/eCD5FG4X And great to see some early coverage: https://lnkd.in/eJst4Vjw Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit NewClimate Institute Oxford Net Zero InfluenceMap Exponential Roadmap Initiative Transition Plan Taskforce (TPT) Doree Marentette Nick Hay

Plenty to admire in the revised Oxford Principles for Net Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting by Oxford Net Zero and co. First there's the conceptual clarity that even those immersed in the minutiae of net zero would derive benefit from reading. There's the essential point that, as we progressively move towards our net zero date of 2050 or thereabouts, the world's offsetting portfolio needs to successfully transition to *durable CO2 removal with a low risk of reversal*. That essentially means massive investment and innovation in — and eventually deployment of — carbon removal that stores CO2 either geologically (e.g. burying CO2 underground) or biologically (e.g. locking it away in biomass). Then there's these two nuggets that deserve to enter the mainstream: 1) Just *3% of offset credits* retired since records began are ‘pure removals’ — i.e. afforestation, reforestation or biochar projects (83% were emission reduction / avoidance projects; 14% mixed reduction and removal credits from projects inc. improved forest management, wetland restoration, sustainable agriculture etc.) 2) Removal approaches with the lowest risk of reversal need to be scaled *30-fold by 2030* and *one-thousand-fold by 2050* under IPCC scenarios aligned with the Paris Agreement temperature goals. As Zeke Hausfather has neatly put it, we'll likely need a carbon removal industry that rivals that of today's global car industry sometime in the second half of the century. See the revised principles here: https://lnkd.in/eufCDY-g And the full report: https://lnkd.in/eZUQRtcx Top work Kaya Axelsson, Steve Smith, Injy Johnstone, Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment - University of Oxford

Today marks two weeks until the annual #UNClimateSummit in Dubai, so as is becoming tradition, I made an #infographic explaining what you need to know about #COP28UAE . Once the context is out of the way — so things like what the UNFCCC stands for and what the Paris Agreement is for — we get into why this one's important: COP28 marks the conclusion of the first UN #globalstocktake, the primary mechanism to review, assess and improve global progress on achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement. (The goals are outlined in the graphic.) There are always hundreds of asks at any one COP, but here are 07 'Key Dubai Asks' that have bubbled to the surface this year: 01 — Stimulating a course correction for #climateaction off the back of the Global Stocktake's political phase, including radically upgrading carbon-cutting NDC pledges for 2030 and 2035. 02 — Delivering on promises already made to the developing world, including operationalising the #lossanddamage facility and agreeing on the post-2025 Climate Finance Goal. 03 — Forging a coalition of the willing to phase *out* fossil fuels this century, the main thing our economies have to do to achieve #netzero and stabilise global average temperature. 04 — Laying the infrastructure, finance and equitable foundations for tripling global renewables capacity to 11,000 GW by 2030 (and doubling progress on #energyefficiency) Freya Newman Fiona Macklin 05 — Agreeing tasks for financial architecture reform. Many global institutions such as the The World Bank were established after WWII. Are they still fit for purpose? Mia Amor Mottley 06 — Scaling up #accountability at the company and municipal levels, including through operationalising the UN #HLEG recommendations on the net zero targets of companies, regions and financial institutions into new UN architecture, such as the recently canvassed 'Recognition & Accountability Framework.' Catherine McKenna Nigel Topping, CMG 07: Delivering for #nature and people, including building on the Global Biodiversity Pledge which 188 governments signed last year. Joanna Benn If interested, you can view the full explainer here: https://lnkd.in/enJn9_Y4 Thanks particularly to my colleagues Gareth Redmond-King, Steve Smith, Katy Sleta and Nick Hay for their generous feedback. Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit Net Zero Tracker Georgina Beasley Ed King Peter Chalkley Anna-Marie March